Abstract

As of the writing of this Editorial, the current JCI Editorial Board has evaluated approximately 7,000 manuscripts over the past 22 months for their suitability for publication in our journal. While many of you have received a negative decision on your manuscript, I suspect few are aware of the changes we have made to our review process to limit reviewers’ requests for what is in our view unnecessary and excessive experimentation.

Abstract

As I draft this editorial, it is almost a year into our stewardship as editors of the JCI. Previous Journal Editors have told me that the evaluation of manuscripts submitted across a broad range of topics and specialties was a highlight for their time as JCI Editor. I’ve found this to be no less true in my case, and I can speak confidently that the entire Editorial Board feels the same enjoyment. As I reflect upon the past year, I’m struck by feelings that range from immense privilege, to enormous responsibility, to, at times, near apoplectic bewilderment.

Abstract

With the December issue of the Journal of Clinical Investigation, I announce the launch of a new category of manuscript called “Clinical Medicine,” along with new editorial board members to adjudicate the peer-review process. With this initiative, the journal aims to publish the highest quality human research that reports early-stage, effective new therapies that impact disease outcomes.

Abstract

There are a hundred reasons to love the JCI and I have loved it truly, madly, and deeply for the last nine years. Alas, I’ll have to learn to love the Journal from afar, as tomorrow marks my last official day as Executive Editor. To quote Chaucer, “There is an end to everything, to good things as well.”

Abstract

On the occasion of the 200th anniversary of Charles Dickens’s birth, I am struck by his creative genius and by the parallel between the intellectual development of his protagonists and the evolution of peer review. Like many of his novels and serial writings, the story of the history of peer review is a bildungsroman, one that has followed a process of growing up, sought answers through a journey marked by achievement and disappointment, and ultimately matured to be accepted by a community.

Abstract

Starting with this issue, the Editorial duties for the JCI move to Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. As we begin our five-year tenure at the helm of this prestigious journal, the tradition of excellence that these two schools typically display on the basketball court now enters the editorial boardroom.

Abstract

The practice of transplanting organs from executed prisoners in China appears to be widespread. We vigorously condemn this practice and, effective immediately, will not consider manuscripts on human organ transplantation for publication unless appropriate non-coerced consent of the donor is provided and substantiated.

Abstract

We live in a time of increased spending, mounting debt, and few remedies for balancing the federal budget that have bipartisan support. Unfortunately, one recent target for decreased allocations of the federal budget is the NIH; the discussion of the awarded grants and the grant funding process has been skewed and altered to present medical research in an unfriendly light, and this can have very damaging repercussions. Politicizing this process could ultimately challenge human health, technology, and economic growth.

Abstract

I’ve listened to many of you moan about the current flat NIH budgets, lack of funding, and the frustration of being a scientist in the current depressed economy. Instead of complaining to only ourselves in the scientific community, we need to make ourselves heard by politicians and the public at large. We need a pundit.